| From: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Vladimir Sitnikov <sitnikov(dot)vladimir(at)gmail(dot)com>, Benjamin Manes <ben(dot)manes(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Andrey Borodin <x4mmm(at)yandex-team(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Arslan Gumerov <garsthe1st(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andrey Chausov <dxahtepb(at)gmail(dot)com>, geymer_98(at)mail(dot)ru, dafi913(at)yandex(dot)ru, edigaryev(dot)ig(at)phystech(dot)edu |
| Subject: | Re: [Patch][WiP] Tweaked LRU for shared buffers |
| Date: | 2019-02-16 14:35:46 |
| Message-ID: | fc812256-90ae-f401-6581-82576204c55b@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2/16/19 10:36 AM, Vladimir Sitnikov wrote:
> Benjamin> A related and helpful patch would be to capture the access log and
> Benjamin> provide anonymized traces.
>
> The traces can be captured via DTrace scripts, so no patch is required here.
>
Right. Or a BPF on reasonably new linux kernels.
> For instance:
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB%3DJe-F_BhGfBu1sO1H7u_XMtvak%3DBQtuJFyv8cfjGBRp7Q_yA%40mail.gmail.com
> or
> https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAH2-WzmbUWKvCqjDycpCOSF%3D%3DPEswVf6WtVutgm9efohH0NfHA%40mail.gmail.com
>
> The missing bit is a database with more-or-less relevant workload.
>
I think it'd be sufficient (or at least reasonable first step) to get
traces from workloads regularly used for benchmarking (different flavors
of pgbench workload, YCSB, TPC-H/TPC-DS and perhaps something else).
A good algorithm has to perform well in those anyway, and applications
generally can be modeled as a mix of those simple workloads.
regards
--
Tomas Vondra http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2019-02-16 14:55:11 | Re: Channel binding |
| Previous Message | Michael Banck | 2019-02-16 12:22:58 | Re: Online verification of checksums |